profootballtalk.com
POSTED 6:33 a.m. EDT, October 12, 2004
PACKERS LOOKING TO JIMMY?
What a difference a month makes.
On September 13, the Packers picked up where they left off in 2003, pasting the Carolina Panthers on the road in the first Monday nighter of the season.
For many Packers fans, it was a glimpse of what might have been but for that fateful 4th-and-26 play against the Eagles. After all, if Philly hadn't converted the first down and gone on to tie and later win the divisional playoff contest with Green Bay, the Pack would have traveled to Carolina the following Sunday for the NFC title game.
But September 13 already is a faded, cracked, and yellow memory for the Cheeseheads, who have now seen four straight losses, including three in a row in the stadium that once was their personal Fortress of Solitude. The capper, of course, was an embarrassing 48-27 loss on Monday night to the previously 1-3 Tennessee Titans.
How embarrassing was that loss? We've heard that word is already circulating through the team's Board of Directors that coach/G.M. Mike Sherman is out after the season, and that some members of the Board want the Pack to pursue Fox commentator Jimmy Johnson to be the new head coach.
The Packers have a unique ownership structure, to say the least. Technically known as Green Bay Packers, Inc., the team is publicly owned. Bob Harlan (who also might want to start thinking about his next career move) is the team's president. Harlan and six other officers form an Executive Committee. The members of the Executive Committee are elected by the 46-member Board of Directors, which includes among its members baseball commissioner Bud Selig (can you say "conflict of interest"?).
With so many members, a Board of that size can be downright unpredictable, especially when the wheels are off the wagon for the first time in nearly a generation. The Packers have been spoiled by an long run of year-in, year-out competitive play, which followed nearly twenty years of general ineptitude. Facing the first real crisis of confidence since the Ron Wolf/Mike Holmgren/Brett Favre era began, it'll be interesting to see how quickly (or slowly) the Executive Committee moves to correct the problem, since in the end their job security is subject to the whimsy of a group of high achievers who surely aren't ready to tolerate a return to the days of 4-win seasons.
As to rumors regarding Jimmy Johnson, we're not ready to put much stock in the possibility that he'll give up the cozy confines of the Fox studios (where no one dishes out "W"'s and "L"'s) for the fixer-upper tundra of Lambeau Field. Johnson is smart enough to see that the roster is riddled with question marks, the most important of which are: (1) how long will Brett Favre stick around; and (2) who in the hell will play quarterback after he leaves?
We know, we know. We've argued that the team and its fans shouldn't obsess over the question of Favre's successor, and we still believe that. But for the guy who'll be asked to come in and clean up the mess in 2005, the unsettled long-term quarterback situation is a legitimate concern, and it could be the one issue that keeps high-profile guys like Johnson and . . . and . . . and . . . hell, there aren't any other high-profile guys who aren't already coaching . . . from taking the job.
A more likely candidate for the job will be Cal's Jeff Tedford. But since Tedford's specialty is offense, the Pack will need a strong defensive coordinator and a G.M. with a knack for building solid defenses.
Speaking of G.M.'s, the far more prudent course for the Pack will be to fill that specific position before finding a coach. And, surely, the new G.M. will have a major role in ferreting through potential head-coaching candidates.
DONAHOE MUST GO
One guy who might want to send a resume to Bob Harlan is Bills G.M. Tom Donahoe. For Donahoe in Buffalo, the handwriting is no longer on the wall -- it's spray painted on his car and tattooed onto his forehead.
With the team reeling at 0-4, normally quiet and reserved Ralph Wilson, the 80-something owner who is far more patient than he should be in light of the numbers on the calendar, is now openly questioning the performance of his team.
And that's a very bad sign for the guy who built it.
"I thought we played lackluster," Wilson said after Sunday's loss to the Jets. "It was very, very tough to watch this offense. I mean, I've watched this game for 60 years. I've heard all the cliches about how we fought back hard. Baloney. The Jets were flat. . . . If you think I'm going to be smiling that we came back and we fought back, baloney. The fans have to be bored.
"I've had enough of this smash-mouth football," Wilson added. "Hey, where we are is 0-3. If Drew [Bledsoe] throws an interception and it's run back for a touchdown, OK. Then we're 0-4. But I don't like to go 0-4 the way we did."
Even as the wire services pick up Wilson's comments and drop them into papers throughout the country, few (if any) members of the media are making the obvious connection between the eruption of Mount St. Wilson and the tenure of Tom Donahoe.
Since Donahoe's arrival in January 2001, the Bills have won 17 and lost 35. In comparison, the Bengals also are 17-35 over that same span. The Cardinals? 17-36. The Chargers? 20-33.
In fact, the only team with fewer wins than the Bills since 2001 is the Lions, who stand at 13-39. But at least the Lions, currently 3-1, have shown signs of steady improvement under Matt Millen. The Bills peaked at 8-8 in 2002, and are now sliding back into the abyss.
So where's the accountability for Donahoe, who built the current roster and hired both Gregg Williams and Mike Mularkey?
When it's time to crow, Donahoe stands front and center. But when it's time to answer for the team's awful play, it was Mularkey, not Donahoe, who faced the press in the wake of Wilson's biting remarks.
Asked on Sunday whom he holds accountable for the current mess, Ralph Wilson put it bluntly.
"Me."
In our view, this was Wilson's way of saying that he regrets turning the team over to a guy who never, ever would accept blame quite so freely. |
